Rethinking the theory and practice of land-use regulation: towards nomocracy

It is often held that planning theory has little influence on planning practice. Some speak of an evident ‘theory-practice gap’. In reality, the opposite seems to be the case. The so-called ‘theorypractice gap’ is not the main issue at all; the real question is ‘which theory for what kind of practice’? Assuming this view, the article presents two different theories of public regulation: the teleocratic approach and the nomocratic approach.They can be interpreted as general approaches regarding the role of the state, but the article focus particularly on the consequences of accepting them in the specific field of land-use regulation. For the teleocratic approach, planning must be the central and most important instrument of land-use regulation, while for the nomocratic approach planning has only a secondary role and different kind of regulative instruments are proposed.